Overview: War and Weapons

Read Article | Comments

Author: Metta Spencer

Even before our primate ancestors began to walk upright, there were wars—times when whole human communities or groups within a community tried to kill each other. Scholars have reached this conclusion partly on the basis of Jane Goodall’s discovery that our closest primate relative, the chimpanzee, engages in war,(1) and partly on the basis of archaeological evidence. One site of skeletons was found in Kenya dating back 9,500 to 10,500 years showing that a group of 27 people had been massacred together.(2) Indeed, there is strong evidence that levels of violence were higher in prehistoric times than today.(3) One example is a cemetery about 14,000 years old where about 45 percent of the skeletons showed signs of violent death.(4) An estimated 15 percent of deaths in primitive societies were caused by warfare.

But life did not consistently become friendlier as our species spread and developed. By one estimate, there were 14,500 wars between 3500 BC and the late twentieth century. These took around 3.5 billion lives.(5)

Can we conclude, then, that war is simply an intrinsic part of “human nature,” so that one cannot reasonably hope to overcome it? No, for there is more variation in the frequency and extent of warfare than can be attributed to genetic differences. In some societies, war is completely absent. Douglas Fry, checking the ethnographic records, identified 74 societies that have clearly been non-warring; some even lacked a word for “war.” The Semai of Malaysia and the Mardu of Australia are examples.(6)

We may gain insights about solutions to warfare by exploring the variations in its distribution, type, and intensity. We begin with the best news: We are probably living in the most peaceful period in human history!


Infographic, Global Day of Action on Military Spending (GDAMS)

Historical Changes in Rates of War

Steven Pinker is the scholar who most convincingly argues that violence has declined, both recently and over the millennia. Pinker’s book Enlightenment Now, contains a graph showing the numbers of battle deaths by year from 1945 to 2015. A huge spike represents World War II, of course, for that was most lethal war in human history, causing at least 55 million deaths. How can we reconcile that ghastly number with any claim that the modern era is a peaceful epoch?

Pinker’s proof is based on distinguishing sharply between absolute numbers and rates. To be sure, 55 million is a huge number, but the Mongol Conquests killed 40 million people back in the thirteenth century, out of a world population only about one-seventh the size of the world’s 1950 population. Pinker says that if World War II had matched the Mongols’ stupendous rate of killing, about 278 million people would have been killed.

Read more

To Post a Comment

Please wait a few seconds for the comments to load at the bottom of this page. Then read the ideas other people have shared and reply or add your own knowledge. The space for comments is in a pale font. It’s good to give your comment a title by selecting it and clicking the “B” (for “boldface”). And you can italicize passages with the “I”, indent, add hyperlinks (with the chain symbol) or even attach a photo or graphic from your hard drive by clicking the paperclip at the right side of the space. Have fun with it!

Notify of

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

“Five reasons to say no to spending $19 billion on war planes”

By: Brent Patterson

The Canadian government intends to sign a $19 billion contract in 2022 with one of three transnational corporations bidding to manufacture 88 fighter jets for the Royal Canadian Air Force. Here are five reasons to say no to that planned purchase:

1- We can’t afford the fighter jets. On July 8, Finance Minister Bill Morneau announced that he expects a $343.2 billion deficit for the 2020-21 fiscal year due to the spending related to the pandemic. This is a dramatic increase from the $19 billion deficit in 2016 when the Trudeau government announced the bidding process for new fighter jets.

Read more

New Technologies Disrupt the Nuclear Balance!

Article by: Elizabeth Sherwood-Randall

“For decades, American policymakers and military planners have focused on preserving what is known in the nuclear lexicon as ‘strategic stability.’ During the Cold War, especially as mutual assured destruction became accepted logic between the United States and the Soviet Union, the pursuit of strategic stability provided a framework for managing the existential risks associated with massive nuclear arsenals.

Under conditions of strategic stability, each superpower recognized that its adversary could massively retaliate against a nuclear first strike—which created a disincentive to resorting to nuclear weapons. Preserving confidence that each side had a “second-strike capability” thus became essential. And even with the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, strategic stability has continued to structure thinking among policymakers and planners about how to create predictability in the nuclear relationship and reduce incentives to escalation.”

Read more

Are these REALLY immoral?

I found this interesting that morality was brought up – why is delegating killing to machines immoral? After all, I believe that humans would need to program the machines to only kill in certain circumstances- therefore the humans make the decision when to kill and under what circumstance. Therefore, the humans really decide…

What’s new?

We need some updates on status of disarmament agreements

Hurting Military Friends’ Feelings

Some of my friends with military backgrounds are deeply offended by the video that we posted this week. It is a recording of our monthly town hall, and we discussed the new proposal to defund the military. You can talk about defunding the police now, but you must nut speak of defunding the military, lest you hurt their feelings. Pride and honor mean too much to them.

But surely everyone can see that all those weapons we have purchased have not given us any security. A tiny virus can kill millions, so we should.be spending on health, education, and climate change. How can anyone take offense because i propose that? The world spends $1.9 trillion per year on militarism. That is ridiculous. Sorry, pal. We are friends but I cannot softpedal that reality to make you feel good about your job.

John Polanyi is a Nobel laureate in chemistry and a professor at the University of Toronto.

We must do more to prevent nuclear war

By John Polanyi December 9, 2019

When Greta Thunberg gives a speech, she wastes no time getting to the point.
“You come to young people for hope,” she told the United Nations General Assembly in September. “You say you understand the urgency…How dare you then pretend that this can be solved by ‘business as usual’?…Change is coming, whether you like it, or not.”
What Greta said is no less true of the most serious danger we face today: nuclear war.
To counter that, the world needs to take two major steps back from the brink of disaster, on which we have teetered for three-quarters of a century. The first of these steps is disarmament, and the second a ban on nuclear weapons.
You may think these overly ambitious aims. But, to many, they represent the minimum that our predicament demands. Fortunately for the world, there are strong precedents for both these steps. Unfortunately, we have yet to heed those precedents.
Why are we faced with this need for change? It stems from the transformative power of modern science, which marks off the age of the atom from all preceding history. This need did not arise overnight, but did happen with remarkable suddenness.
The word “atom” is based on the Greek “a-tomos”: “not divisible”. Scientists, beginning with Ernest Rutherford, began questioning that thousand-year-old supposition. Rutherford and his students realised that they had in their experiments broken the atom apart. Then, a student of my father’s, Leo Szilard, devised a way of harnessing the energy released in the nuclear break-up. His idea was to exploit the chemist’s notion of chain reaction.
In 1935, when I was a child, Szilard sat in the garden of our house in Manchester, calculating, with my father, the temperature that would be reached in a nuclear chain reaction (which Szilard had patented, donating the patent to the British navy). The answer was thousands of millions of degrees centigrade. Ten years later, in 1945, two atomic bombs based on this idea were used in war, and 200,000 people were killed.
That was the start of our new era, as different from earlier times as the iron age was from the stone age. Since the ages of mankind only follow one another at thousand-year intervals, you should reflect on the extraordinary timing of your arrival on this planet. If, rather than being born in recent decades, you had been born in the previous thousands of years, great feats of imagination would not have been required of you. Today, they are needed for your, and your fellow beings’, survival.
Read more

Prevent the weaponization of space

The Russian News Agency TASS has published articles about the Kremlin’s recent statements on preventing the weaponization of space. This appears to be a response to President Trump’s recent statement on potential commercial activities on the moon. Let’s remember the 1966 Outer Space Treaty.

Any attempts to ‘privatize’ outer space unacceptable — Kremlin

GENEVA, August 14. /TASS/. Moscow calls on the global community to develop consensus measures to keep outer space free from weapons, which will contribute to strengthening peace and security, Russian Permanent Representative to the UN Office and other international organizations in Geneva Gennady Gatilov said at a plenary meeting of the Conference on Disarmament on Wednesday.

“We call on all states to have a meaningful, constructive conversation to prevent an arms race in outer space with a view to jointly developing consensus measures to keep outer space free from weapons and thereby strengthen international peace and global security,” the diplomat said.

“There is no time to spare,” he stressed. “Missing this chance will be a crime against future generations.”

Gatilov recalled that, in 2004, Russia assumed the obligation not to be the first to deploy weapons in outer space. To date, 21 countries have become full-fledged participants in that initiative. The head of the Russian mission voiced regret and concern over the fact that none of the Western countries, primarily from among the ones significant in terms of space exploration, expressed a desire to join it until now.

Gatilov stressed that the implementation of intentions to bring weapons to the near-Earth space would have an adverse effect on international security and global stability.

“Thanks to efforts made by individual Western countries, we are entering a new space era,” he noted. “We can say with a high degree of probability that it will be marked by further degradation of trust between nations.”

The diplomat described statements on deploying weapons in outer space and their potential combat use as “an ultimatum to the global community” and the intention to seek uncontrolled dominance in outer space. He noted that this would give an opportunity for individual countries to dictate their terms both in the low Earth orbit and on Earth.

Russia remains committed to “finding reliable ways to keep outer space free from weapons of any kind,” Gatilov noted. One of the ways of achieving that goal would be “a legally binding treaty on preventing the deployment of weapons in outer space based on the principles and norms of the 1967 Outer Space Treaty,” he said. The diplomat explained that the signing of such an agreement and participation of countries most active in space in it would make it possible to remove preconditions for turning outer space into the armed confrontation sphere.”

The Conference on Disarmament consists of 65 countries. It was established in 1979 following the first special UN General Assembly session on disarmament held in 1978 as the only international negotiating forum of the global community to hammer out disarmament agreements.

7 April 2020 https://tass.com/science/1141217

More information on the 1966 Outer Space Treaty is available here: https://www.unoosa.org/oosa/en/ourwork/spacelaw/treaties/introouterspacetreaty.html

I am wondering as to the phrasing of the treaty – does it cover all classes of weapons? It discusses prohibition of Nuclear Weapons and WMDs.

What about newer activities like asteroid and lunar mining? How would this fit within the notion of “outer space is not subject to national appropriation by claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means?”

The United Nations Office of Outer Space Affairs offers the following principals for the 1966/1967 Outer Space Treaty:

The Outer Space Treaty provides the basic framework on international space law, including the following principles:

  • the exploration and use of outer space shall be carried out for the benefit and in the interests of all countries and shall be the province of all mankind;
  • outer space shall be free for exploration and use by all States;
  • outer space is not subject to national appropriation by claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means;
  • States shall not place nuclear weapons or other weapons of mass destruction in orbit or on celestial bodies or station them in outer space in any other manner;
  • the Moon and other celestial bodies shall be used exclusively for peaceful purposes;
  • astronauts shall be regarded as the envoys of mankind;
  • States shall be responsible for national space activities whether carried out by governmental or non-governmental entities;
  • States shall be liable for damage caused by their space objects; and
  • States shall avoid harmful contamination of space and celestial bodies.


Regarding the last point, there is already a lot of debris and junk orbiting Earth. Should this be cleaned up eventually? Is it “harmful contamination?”

When the Minuteman Missiles Disappeared

This is an alarming article by Dr. Bruce G. Blair – one of the co-founders of Global Zero.

“It is tempting for the United States to exploit its superiority in cyberwarfare to hobble the nuclear forces of North Korea or other opponents. As a new form of missile defense, cyberwarfare seems to offer the possibility of preventing nuclear strikes without the firing of a single nuclear warhead.

But as with many things involving nuclear weaponry, escalation of this strategy has a downside: United States forces are also vulnerable to such attacks.

Imagine the panic if we had suddenly learned during the Cold War that a bulwark of America’s nuclear deterrence could not even get off the ground because of an exploitable deficiency in its control network.

We had such an Achilles’ heel not so long ago. Minuteman missiles were vulnerable to a disabling cyberattack, and no one realized it for many years. If not for a curious and persistent President Barack Obama, it might never have been discovered and rectified.

Read more

Nuclear Vulnerability to Hacking the Missile Controls

By Dr. Bruce G. Blair – one of the co-founders of Global Zero.

New York Times 14 March 2017
Article Excerpt(s):

“It is tempting for the United States to exploit its superiority in cyberwarfare to hobble the nuclear forces of North Korea or other opponents. As a new form of missile defense, cyberwarfare seems to offer the possibility of preventing nuclear strikes without the firing of a single nuclear warhead.

But as with many things involving nuclear weaponry, escalation of this strategy has a downside: United States forces are also vulnerable to such attacks.

Imagine the panic if we had suddenly learned during the Cold War that a bulwark of America’s nuclear deterrence could not even get off the ground because of an exploitable deficiency in its control network.
Read more

Could the Coronavirus Be a Biological Weapon in the Not-Too-Distant Future?

By Deen, Thalif
Inter Press Service: News Agency 20 March 2020

Article Excerpt(s):

“The devastating spread of the deadly coronavirus across every continent– with the exception of Antarctica– has triggered a conspiracy theory on social media: what if the virus was really a biological weapon?

And more specifically, was it an experimental weapon that accidentally escaped from a laboratory in China?

Or as others contend, is it a weapon surreptitiously introduced to de-stabilize a country with more than 1.4 billion people and described as the world’s second largest economy, after the United States.

Both narratives are considered false, and probably part of a deliberate disinformation campaign, according to military experts.

Still, in the US, Senator Tom Cotton of Arkansas has repeated the charge that the virus was a creation of the Chinese military while others source it to North Korea.

Read more

Here Earl Turcotte – the Chair of the Canadian Network to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (CNANW) – examines the links between nuclear disarmament and other global crises, such as pandemics.

Public Health Crisis Offers New Lens Towards Nuclear Disarmament

Earl Turcotte, The Hill Times, 15 April 2020

“That COVID-19 has created a new global reality is clear. If there is any positive aspect to this unfolding situation, it could be a deeper understanding of the fact that the well-being of people throughout the world is inextricably linked. The COVID crisis might also serve as a cautionary tale, helping us to appreciate the fragility of life and avoid threats to humanity that are within our control.

In 2019, a team of researchers at Princeton University simulated a limited exchange of low-yield “tactical” nuclear weapons to depict “a plausible escalating war between the United States and Russia, using realistic nuclear force postures, targets, and fatality estimates.” They concluded that more than 90 million people would be killed or injured within a few hours and many more would die in the years following.
Read more

Here Senator Douglas Roche discusses the interconnection of conflicts / wars and COVID-19. he obviously admires the Secretary General of the United Nations for his bold proposal to cease warfare during the pandemic.

Warring Parties Must Lay Down Weapons To Fight Bigger Battle Against COVID-19

By Douglas Roche, the Hill Times, 6 April 2020
Article Excerpt(s):

EDMONTON—”The fury of the virus illustrates the folly of war.” In one short sentence, UN Secretary-General António Guterres opened the door to a new understanding of what constitutes human security. Will governments seize the opportunity provided by the immense crisis of COVID-19 to finally adopt a global agenda for peace?

In an extraordinary move on March 23, Guterres urged warring parties around the world to lay down their weapons in support of the bigger battle against COVID-19 the common enemy now threatening all of humanity. He called for an immediate global ceasefire everywhere: “It is time to put armed conflict on lockdown and focus together on the true fight of our lives.”

His plea to “silence the guns” would create corridors for life-saving aid and open windows for diplomacy in the war-torn zones in Syria, Yemen, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and the central areas of Africa.

But the full meaning of Guterres’s appeal is much bigger than only suspending existing wars. It is a wakeup call to governments everywhere that war does not solve existing problems, that the huge expenditures going into armaments divert money desperately needed for health supplies, that a bloated militarism is impotent against the new killers in a globalized world.
Read more

The Bomb Still Ticks

By George Perkovich April 07, 2020
Summary: Kaplan shows in his new book that the Americans and Russians who built the doomsday machine will not allow it to be dismantled. The more pertinent question is whether they could be motivated to meaningfully downsize and constrain it.

“Nuclear books don’t sell,” a New York book editor advised not long ago. “To have a chance, you would have to feature a really interesting central character.” Fred Kaplan’s excellent new volume, “The Bomb: Presidents, Generals, and the Secret History of Nuclear War,” will test this proposition.

Plenty of characters (nearly all male) abound in his fast-paced easy-to-follow narrative: from Curtis LeMay, Robert McNamara, John Kennedy, Henry Kissinger, Richard Nixon, and so on to Barack Obama and Donald Trump. But what drives the story is an unresolvable dilemma: “[h]ow to plan a nuclear attack that [is] large enough to terrify the enemy but small enough to be recognized unambiguously as a limited strike, so that, if the enemy retaliated, he’d keep his strike limited too” (p. 120).

Read more

Stephen Young is Washington representative for the Global Security Program at the Union of Concerned Scientists. By Stephen Young, 27 February 2020.

House Hearings Should Reveal Recklessness of Administration’s Nuclear Weapons Budget Request

Article Excerpt(s):
“The Trump administration is charging ahead with new nuclear weapon systems and joining a new nuclear arms race with Russia. Not only are these weapons pushing up current budgets by billions, but they are unnecessary add-ons to an already bloated, excessively expensive plan to rebuild the entire U.S. arsenal. Coupled with the Trump administration’s disdain for arms control, these new weapons will lead to a more dangerous strategic environment.

Read more

Canada Played a Critical Role in Nuclear Development. We Should Play a Critical Role in Reparations

This is an interesting article about some (not all) of Canada’s connections to nuclear weapons.

By Matt Korda
CBC News Opinion, 30 August 2019
Article Excerpt(s):

“Canada holds contradictory positions in the world of nuclear weapons. We played an essential role in their development, but we never built any bombs of our own.

No nukes are stationed on Canadian soil; however, they were for 20 years, until we finally sent the last American warheads back home in 1984.

As a people, Canadians are largely against nuclear weapons; however, Canada is part of a nuclear alliance and our government actively participates in NATO’s Nuclear Planning Group.

Almost 60 per cent of Canadians live in regions that have banned nuclear weapons, like Ontario, Manitoba, and the Northwest Territories, or in self-proclaimed nuclear weapons-free cities like Toronto, Vancouver, and Red Deer, Alta.; however, we currently allow American and British nuclear-capable vessels to visit our ports.

Very simply, in the nuclear arena, Canada is awkwardly straddling a line –– we’re not a member of the nuclear club, but we’re not exactly outside of it either. This position usually works in Canada’s favour, because it lets us simultaneously satisfy both our anti-nuclear impulses and our NATO defence commitments.

Read more

How the Coronavirus Outbreak is like a Nuclear Attack: An Interview with Jeffrey Lewis

This Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists’ interview with Dr. Jeffrey Lewis – author of “The 2020 Commission Report on the North Korean Nuclear Attacks Against the United States: A Speculative Novel.”

Jeffrey Lewis and John Krzyzaniak
Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, 20 March 2020
Article Excerpt(s):

“One thing about nuclear command and control, which the virus outbreak underscores, is that it is so hard to get good information in a crisis. The epidemic spiraled out of control so quickly in certain countries that even the best experts were rushing to figure out what was going on.

To me the danger of a nuclear war is not that somebody’s going to get up one morning and say, “Ah, fuck it,” and push the button. It’s that we’re deeply flawed as human beings, and we have imperfect information, and we’re always trying to make decisions under complexity.

Read more

The South China Morning Post published this editoria about the NPT Does it reflect wider Chinese opinions?

Talks Give World an Opportunity to Avoid Nuclear Weapons Nightmare

South China Morning Post, 20 March 2020
Article Excerpt(s):

“The United States sparked fears of a new nuclear arms race when it pulled out of a key missile treaty with Russia little more than six months ago. Hopes of preventing a race are now focused on another pact credited with helping keep us safe since the height of the Cold War – the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), which came into force 50 years ago this month. More importance now attaches to a five-yearly treaty review conference set to be held at the United Nations headquarters in New York next month.

The US pulled out of the Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF) signed in 1987 after Washington and Nato accused Russia of violating it by deploying a new type of cruise missile, which Moscow has denied. Russia suspended its own obligations to the treaty shortly afterwards. It is reassuring therefore that the five permanent members of the Security Council, including the US and Russia, have marked the anniversary of the NPT with a joint declaration celebrating “the immeasurable contributions” this landmark treaty has made to international security and prosperity and reaffirming their commitment to it. Such a consensus is increasingly rare these days.

Read more

Alarming US acceptance of Landmine Use

Here’s an excerpt from the World Federalist newsletter.

Article Excerpt(s):

At the end of January, US President Donald Trump reversed the Obama-era ban on the use of landmines (other than in the defence of South Korea).

The brief statement from the White House says, “The Department of Defense has determined that restrictions imposed on American forces by the Obama Administration’s policy could place them at a severe disadvantage during a conflict against our adversaries. The President is unwilling to accept this risk to our troops.”

Read more

So you’re telling me that Trump and the USA are willing to just use any type of weapon as long as it gives them the advantage?!!!!

Do Young People Care About Nuclear Weapons?

By Matt Korda, Inkstick, 27 February 2020
Article Excerpt(s):

“Last month, the International Committee of the Red Cross released a report with a shocking — and seemingly contradictory — pair of statistics.

According to the report, a majority of millennials (54%) believe that a nuclear attack will occur within the next decade. Yet those same respondents simultaneously ranked nuclear weapons as the “least important” out of 12 global issues.

These findings, although seemingly in conflict, may not actually be that surprising. In fact, they reflect an existential question that the nuclear community has been grappling with for some time:


Two of the most common responses to this question are either: “we should scare the youths straight,” or: “we should meme nuclear weapons.” Neither of these is the answer. In fact, millennial Dadaist humor is already rooted in an ironic acceptance of the dystopian years that lie ahead of us. We’re terrified of our futures and apocalyptic memes are our defense mechanism.
Read more

One potential victim of coronavirus? Nuclear inspections in Iran

By George M. Moore, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, 17 March 2020
Article Excerpt(s):

” Should the new IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi decide to suspend inspection visits to protect the health of his inspectors, it could metastasize concerns about Iranian nuclear proliferation. The same result would occur if Iran acted unilaterally to bar inspectors based on real or manufactured concerns about further spread of Covid-19.

To date, there is no public information about whether the IAEA will continue to send inspectors to Iran under the terms of the nuclear deal. Suspending inspections, even temporarily, could potentially leave a multi-month gap that Iran could exploit if it chose to fully break out of the nuclear agreement. In early March, the IAEA reported that Iran had amassed over 1,000 kilograms of low-enriched uranium, nearly triple the amount allowed under the deal.
Read more

Here Dr. Tariq Rauf discusses the impacts of COVID-19 (aka coronavirus) on the upcoming Non-Proliferation Treaty conferences. There is a possibility the conferences and associated discussions will be pushed to 2021 and beyond.

Relentless Spread of Coronavirus Obliges Postponing the 2020 NPT Review to 2021

By Tariq Rauf

Article Excerpt(s):

“Harvard University epidemiology professor Marc Lipsitch in his “very, very rough” estimate (relying on “multiple assumptions piled on top of each other”) has stated that 100 or 200 people were infected in the U.S. a week or so ago. But that is all it would take to widely spread the disease. Lipsitch has predicted that within a year, 40% to 70% of the world’s population could be infected with COVID-19? With the world’s population hovering around 7.5 billion, that translates to some 3 to 5 billion people getting COVID-19 and that perhaps fatalities of 60 to 100 million, according to Lipsitch.
Read more

A World War Could Break Out in the Arctic

By Michael Klare
The Nation, 11 feb. 2020

Finnmark, Norway

Notes: Discusses various elements ranging from the role of the military to the role of the resource extraction industry. Particular focus is on the new military exercises that will be occurring in March 2020 in Scandinavia.

Article Excerpt:

“In early March, an estimated 7,500 American combat troops will travel to Norway to join thousands of soldiers from other NATO countries in a massive mock battle with imagined invading forces from Russia. In this futuristic simulated engagement—it goes by the name of Exercise Cold Response 2020—allied forces will “conduct multinational joint exercises with a high-intensity combat scenario in demanding winter conditions,” or so claims the Norwegian military anyway. At first glance, this may look like any other NATO training exercise, but think again. There’s nothing ordinary about Cold Response 2020. As a start, it’s being staged above the Arctic Circle, far from any previous traditional NATO battlefield, and it raises to a new level the possibility of a great-power conflict that might end in a nuclear exchange and mutual annihilation. Welcome, in other words, to World War III’s newest battlefield.

For the soldiers participating in the exercise, the potentially thermonuclear dimensions of Cold Response 2020 may not be obvious. At its start, Marines from the United States and the United Kingdom will practice massive amphibious landings along Norway’s coastline, much as they do in similar exercises elsewhere in the world. Once ashore, however, the scenario becomes ever more distinctive. After collecting tanks and other heavy weaponry “prepositioned” in caves in Norway’s interior, the Marines will proceed toward the country’s far-northern Finnmark region to help Norwegian forces stave off Russian forces supposedly pouring across the border. From then on, the two sides will engage in—to use current Pentagon terminology—high-intensity combat operations under Arctic conditions (a type of warfare not seen on such a scale since World War II).

Read more

There is ongoing debate in Ireland about allowing the United States’ military to use airports – both as a base for operations, as well as a stopover.

Should the Irish government push for an end to the US military use of Shannon Airport?

News Agency: The Journal (Ireland) 29 January 2020
Article Excerpt:

If in Government, Labour would push for an end to the use of Shannon Airport for US military planes according to party leader Brendan Howlin.
Read more

New York City Divests Pension Funds from Fossil Fuel Companies. Next maybe nuclear weapons?

Jonathan Granoff

In January 2018, New York City decided to divest the city’s $189bn pension funds from fossil fuel companies within the next five years. Now the city looks set to also divest from the nuclear weapons industry.

Last Tuesday (January 28), the Council held public hearings on draft Resolution 0976 which calls on New York City to support the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons and divest from the nuclear weapons industry, and on Initiative 1621 to reaffirm New York City as a nuclear weapons-free zone and establish an advisory committee to implement this status.
Read more

Divest Nuclear!

On Tuesday last week (January 28), New York City Council held public hearings on two measures (draft Resolution 0976 and Initiative 1621) which if adopted would oblige the city to divest its city pension funds from the nuclear weapons industry and establish an advisory committee to develop city action to further implement its status as a nuclear-weapon-free zone.

New York City pensions have approximately $480 million invested in the nuclear weapons industry. The divestment of this amount would probably not make any financial impact on the weapons manufacturers. However, it would serve as a positive example of an action that can be taken by cities and other investors to align their investments with their ethical values. And it would give support to federal initiatives to cut nuclear weapons budgets, such as the SANE Act introduced into the U.S. Senate by PNND Co-President Ed Markey and the Nuclear Weapons Abolition and Economic and Energy Conversion Act, introduced into the U.S. House of Representatives by PNND Member Eleanor Holmes-Norton.
Read more

Risk of Nuclear War Rises as U.S. Deploys a New Nuclear Weapon for the First Time Since the Cold War

By William Arkin, Democracy Now! 7 Feb. 2020
Article Excerpt:

The Federation of American Scientists revealed in late January that the U.S. Navy had deployed for the first time a submarine armed with a low-yield Trident nuclear warhead. The USS Tennessee deployed from Kings Bay Submarine Base in Georgia in late 2019. The W76-2 warhead, which is facing criticism at home and abroad, is estimated to have about a third of the explosive power of the atomic bomb the U.S. dropped on Hiroshima.

The International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN) called the news “an alarming development that heightens the risk of nuclear war.” We’re joined by William Arkin, longtime reporter focused on military and nuclear policy, author of numerous books, including “Top Secret America: The Rise of the New American Security State.” He broke the story about the deployment of the new low-yield nuclear weapon in an article he co-wrote for Federation of American Scientists. He also recently wrote a cover piece for Newsweek titled “With a New Weapon in Donald Trump’s Hands, the Iran Crisis Risks Going Nuclear.” “What surprised me in my reporting … was a story that was just as important, if not more important, than what was going on in the political world,” Arkin says.


AMY GOODMAN: As the nation focused on President Trump’s impeachment trial, a major story recently broke about a new development in U.S. nuclear weapons policy that received little attention. The Federation of American Scientists revealed in late January the U.S. Navy had for the first time deployed a submarine armed with a low-yield Trident nuclear warhead. The USS Tennessee deployed from Kings Bay Submarine Base in Georgia in late 2019, armed with a warhead which is estimated to have about a third of the explosive power of the atomic bomb the U.S. dropped on Hiroshima.
Read more

How to dispose of plutonium?

Russia and the USA agreed to dispose of 34 tons of weapons-grade plutonium. This was an agreement made in 2000 – 20 years ago.  

It is unclear how the USA plans on safely disposing of this surplus plutonium – as the 8 November 2018 senate report mentions they are cancelling the MOX program – though no viable alternative exists. Russia has been using fast reactors to burn up the surplus material. 
Read more


Who will send them into action?

If we had an emergency peace service, what would be the procedure for sending them into action? The ICJ ruled that Myanmar had gravely wronged the Rohingya, but that was three years ago. Would UNEPS be sent to intervene immediately, not delaying justice three years?

Amazing discussion, with this being the key question. All addressed at length in my book called “World Peace Through Law: Replacing War With the Global Rule of Law” (Routledge 2018). For a discount flyer, email me at jamestranney@post.harvard.edu

What is the current status of sonic weapons?

Are these prohibited under any of the treaties?

I have heard of some sonic weapons that play the person’s own voice back to them at a slight delay, causing the person to stop talking – as well as some that mess with people through ultra-low volumes and/or infrequent noises.

Sonic weapons: Sonic and ultrasonic weapons (USW) are weapons of various types that use sound to injure, incapacitate, or kill an opponent. Some sonic weapons are currently in limited use or in research and development by military and police forces

Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sonic_weapon

Radioactive Chemical Gas!

I have been reading “Plutopia” by Dr. Kate Brown – a MIT professor of Science, Technology, and Society.

Dr. Brown discusses that during the early stages of Hanford’s development – the US government temporarily considered using strontium-90 byproducts to create a radioactive chemical gas – that could be used on battlefields. This strontium-90 based gas would be incredibly dangerous – with both immediate and lingering effects. Fortunately, military officials and researchers deemed it too dangerous to create and too dangerous to use – so it was never implementing. Alarming to consider nonetheless.

Why don’t nations just ban killer robots?

“Nations dawdle on agreeing rules to control ‘killer robots’ in future wars”

by Nita Bhalla, Reuters [17 January 2020]

“Countries are rapidly developing “killer robots” – machines with artificial intelligence (AI) that independently kill – but are moving at a snail’s pace on agreeing global rules over their use in future wars, warn technology and human rights experts.

Read more

At the end of the day, it’s all just a security dilemma. All countries have to decide to ban these weapons together, otherwise none will- because then certain countries will have the advantage. After all, these weapons give such an advantage…but at what cost?

From October 2018:

The Case Against France

“France is being taken to the International Criminal Court (ICC) for carrying out nuclear weapons tests in French Polynesia, a Polynesian opposition leader announced on Tuesday.”

“France carried out 193 nuclear weapons tests on islands in the archipelago between 1960 and 1996 until French President Jacques Chirac halted the program.

Around 150,000 military and civilian personnel were involved in France’s nuclear tests, with thousands of them later developing serious health problems.

France has long denied responsibility for the detrimental health and environmental impacts of the tests, fearing that it would weaken the country’s nuclear program during the Cold War.

In 2010, France passed a law allowing military veterans and civilians to be compensated if their cancer could be attributed to the nuclear tests.

Out of approximately 1,000 people who have filed complaints against France, only 20 have been compensated.”

The article additionally discusses German anti-nuclear protests.


Shipping Containers: The Poor Man’s ICBM

Radioactive materials have been found in shipping containers before, such as a batch of Cobalt-60 discovered in an Italian port. It was within a container of scrap metal originating from Jeddah, Saudia Arabia and destined for Genoa, Italy. The container sat around for over a year, until authorities could figure out who was responsible for it and subsequently how to safely handle and remove it.

By Matthew Wallin, 1 September 2011, American Security Project

Excerpt: “60,000 people dead—instantly. 150,000 more exposed to hazardous radiation. All ships and infrastructure at the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach destroyed. An exodus of six million people from the greater Los Angeles region. Initial costs of $1 trillion. This is exactly the scenario considered in a 2006 RAND Corporation study of the effects of a possible detonation of a 10-kiloton nuclear device hidden in a standard 20-foot shipping container. In 2010 alone, these ports received a combined total of over 7.2 million 20-foot equivalent containers. Haystack indeed. ”
Read more

Diego Garcia and the Chagossians

Diego Garcia is a remote atoll archipelago in the Indian Ocean – between the Maldives, Mauritius, and the Seychelles. For administrative purposes, it is considered part of the British Indian Ocean Territory (BIOT).

In the 1500s, the Portuguese used the area as a slave depot. Prior to this, the islands were uninhabited. A cultural group – known as the Chagossians – and who have a distinct language – emerged from the slave trade. During the Cold War, the Chagossians were evicted by the American and British military forces who cited the strategic geographic importance of the islands in relation to global and regional security – within the specific context of air and maritime access.

Various tactics were used to remove the population (population: 1500 in the late 1960s – 3000-4000 in the 2010s) – including inviting the population to neighboring Mauritius for a conference during Christmas in 1965 and subsequently prohibiting return to Diego Garcia. Other tactics included forced removal – such as via blockade of food supplies and/or forced (and allegedly violent) deportation. Alleged military documents – cited in books about Diego Garcia and its associated foreign policies – indicate that suppression of rights of the Chagossians were encouraged during the late 1960s due to the geopolitical significance of the region. By 1973, all Chagossians had been expelled from Diego Garcia.
Read more

What the CANDU reactor has done abroad

This is a CANDU reactor: Darlington

An excerpt:

“Our uranium and nuclear technology launched the UK and USA stockpiles, then the Indian nuclear arsenal, followed by Pakistan and others. We continued to sell our CANDU reactor for ‘peaceful energy use’ which was secretly described as a “military plutonium production reactor” by the insiders ever since the Manhattan Project.”

“Plutonium=forever.” Even if bombs are not made, plutonium goes on and on emitting deadly radiation for centuries.

“… ‘following the atoms’ proves that we are a boy-scout nation with a very dirty secret. It has been underwritten by $30 billion taxpayer dollars, greased with secret bribes to win export deals, and buried in decades of deceit by official Ottawa.”


Beware the Solar Flares!

Is there a risk that a solar flare or solar store – of sufficient strength, such as one comparable to the 1859 Carrington Event – could trigger the detonation and/or launch of a nuclear warhead? Several media articles indicate a solar flare in 1967 almost started a nuclear exchange due to communication and radio signals being jammed.

However (and fortunately) some space weather scientists identified the cause was a solar flare. There was another incident where sunlight reflecting off the atmosphere almost triggered a nuclear launch – as early computer systems interpreted it as a nuclear flash. This would have been around the 1960s. Alarming to think about!

The 1859 Carrington Event was one of the largest solar storms with extensive records. There were a limited amount of electronic devices in this era – mostly telegraph wires – which were reported to have gone absolutely haywire when the storm hit.


Most clashes are about race or religion

As heartening as it is to read of, for example, communing large multi-racial and -religious groups of people humanely allied against the common enemy of blind hatred, I nonetheless dread that it will sadly resettle to normal everyday life—and politics.

There are no greater differences amongst us humans than race and religion—remove that and left are less obvious differences over which to clash, such as sub-racial identity (i.e. ethnicity), nationality, and so forth down that scale we tumble.

Hypothetically, reduce our species to just a few city blocks of residents who are similar in every way and eventually there may still be some sort of bitter inter-neighbourhood fighting.

Will The Arms Merchants Comply?

The Arms Trade Treaty limits what weapons a country can sell to other countries, especially if the weapons are likely to be used to attack others. So is there any evidence so far that it is working? Has any country actually changed its plans and refrained from selling weapons just because it signed the treaty? I’m trying not to be cynical in asking. I’d prefer to hear good news.

Two Cheers for China!

We can’t be sure which countries would have sold arms if they hadn’t signed the treaty. However, there is some REALLY good news: China has just signed the Arms Trade Treaty! That is one reason why its influence is growing at the United Nations, while the US is losing influence. China declared that it allows arms exports only to sovereign states and not to non-state actors. The Treaty was adopted by the UN in 2013. Obama endorsed it, but Trump says he will revoke the US signature. I hope it slips his mind until he is ousted from office this fall (knock on wood).

Is China More Reliable Than Canada?

Let’s hope that China is better at keeping its treaty commitments than Canada, which signed the treaty in September 2019, but nevertheless is forging ahead with a plan to sell light armed personnel carriers to Saudi Arabia. The treaty is designed to prohibit the export of arms that could be used to perpetrate war crimes, genocide and other grave violations of international law.

What Will Biden Do?

It is true, as Ruth Needham says, that we cannot know why any country refrains from anything. But we can infer something about motives by looking at the list of countries that did not sign the Arms Trade Treaty right away. The nations that initially abstained included the world’s leaders in weapon exports–notably China and Russia, but also Cuba, India, Indonesia, Myanmar, Nicaragua, Saudi Arabia, and Sudan. That means it’s a wonderful sign that China has now signed. Obama did too, but it was never ratified. I wonder whether the US would (will) ratify it when the Democrats get back into power in Congress and the White House.

How Much Shall we Cut Military Expenditures?

comment image

Notice that the Platform for Survival does not say how much we are supposed to reduce the size of the military. I was in the audience at the forum when we discussed that and I heard the proposal originally was 80 percent. We were told that such a high number would be considered unreasonable or even laughable. But I think it is a good number. Reduce all the military systems in the world by 80 percent and we’d be on our way to a real solution to other global problems.

And yes, it will be hard to do. But I’d like us to pick a target number, please. Lately Bernie Sanders has proposed a ten percent reduction. Okay, that’s a starting point. Who will raise the bid?

Would that be good for bad for the economy?

Were they referring to just the military itself – or the number of businesses, industries, etc. which have the military as significant economic partners? What type of extent would reducing the (US?) military that much have on the global economy?

Rank Countries for their Demilitarizing

Good point. Maybe we should assign scores to countries based on how much they have reduced their military spending and converted it to the development of negative emission technologies — e.g. forest planting or carbon capture and conversion to fuel.

Hooray for the Pope!

Yes, it’s a great interview. I particularly like his statements that it’s a sin merely to own nuclear weapons, and that it’s hypocrisy to say you believe in peace while you’re making money from selling weapons. Right on, Francis!

This is a related article discussing the issue of cyber weapons and how they might participate on the battlefield.

Read more

That’s an understatement, Richard. It’s about a woman who quit Google last year because of their military project. She says that AI can accidentally start a war.


An Open Letter to Justin Trudeau

I am commenting by incorporating the whole of a recent letter from the Canadian Network to Abolish Nuclear Weapons to the Prime Minister and many other government officials. In an election period, all concerned citizens should make known their views to candidates, and ask questions at all-candidates meetings in their riding.
Adele Buckley
Canadian Pugwash, a member group of CNANW


Nuclear Disarmament: Canadian Leadership Required

Open Letter to PM Justin Trudeau
cc. All Members of Parliament and Senators

Dear Prime Minister,

The risk of nuclear catastrophe is growing and urgent action is required to prevent it.

Recent developments include:

• marked deterioration in East/West relations, most notably between Russia and NATO;
• U.S. withdrawal from the nuclear agreement with Iran;
• imminent U.S. and Russian withdrawal from the Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty;
• poor prospects for renewal of New START in 2021;
• heightened military tension between nuclear-armed India and Pakistan;
• resurgence of North Korea’s nuclear weapons program;
• the development of ‘tactical nuclear weapons’ and hypersonic missile systems;
• increased vulnerability to cyber-attacks; and
• the real possibility that non-state actors will acquire and use nuclear weapons or fissile material.

All of this is occurring within the context of a new nuclear arms race, precipitated in large part, by the U.S. allocation of $1.5 trillion to ‘modernize’ its nuclear arsenal over the next 30 years.

The Bulletin of Atomic Scientists has set the Doomsday Clock to 2 minutes to midnight, the closest it has been since the height of the Cold War. Humanity, literally, faces the prospect that at any moment, human folly, miscalculation or nuclear accident could end life on earth as we know it, if not completely.

Canada can help to prevent this.
Read more

Laser Broom to Tidy Up Space

In 1978, Donald J. Kessler theorized that kessler syndrome would become a significant issue. This is where debris in orbit collides with other items in orbit, causing a cascading chain reaction. This was a plot in the 2013 movie Gravity – where a satellite that was shot down for decommissioning and started a cascading chain reaction that took out communications and research satellites across the world.

Orbital decay would take decades in some cases and it would be virtually impossible to launch new satellites or repair missions to pre-existing satellite if this was occurring .There is already research into a laser broom in attempts to clear some of the pre-existing debris from the planet’s orbit.

Here is a CBC article about a laser broom from 2000: https://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/laser-broom-will-sweep-up-space-junk-1.243442

We, the People, have to Demand Compliance

There’s a vigorous campaign going on now called “Campaign Against the Arms Trade.” And one of their specific objectives is to “stop arming Saudi Arabia!”

Stop Arming Saudi.jpg

Nuclear terror

Personally I find the thought of Nuclear War pretty scary and to have heard stories from survivors makes it even more real and terrifying. To think that our world could end in a heartbeat threatens to throw me into despair. Its only the kindness of some humans that gives me hope in addition to a belief in a God Creator who is taking care of us.

Screenshot 2019-09-12 14.56.14.png

Is there a risk of a similar incident in the American context? I have heard several alarming reports, such as the fact that the production of intermediate missile materials – such as an aerogel foam used within the warhead itself – have fallen out of general production. One such material is “fogbank” which was manufactured in Oak Ridge, Tennessee. The material is so classified that finding manufacturing instructions and records have been a significant challenge for the industry, as pre-existing materials age out and need replacing.

Read more

Does Turkey want nuclear weapons? This is from Newsweek.

Turkey Has U.S. Nuclear Weapons, Now It Says It Should be Allowed to Have Some of Its Own

by Tom O’Connor | 9/4/19 AT 6:13 PM EDT

The American nuclear weapons are at Incirlik Air Base in Turkey, shown here.

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has argued that his country should be allowed to develop nuclear weapons as other major powers have.

Addressing the Central Anatolian Economic Forum in the central province of Sivas, Erdogan lauded the expansion of the Turkish defense industry, especially recent conversations with the United States and Russia, while hinting at future talks with China. He then recalled how “some countries have missiles with nuclear warheads” and “not just one or two.”

“But I cannot possess missiles with nuclear warheads? I do not accept that,” Erdogan said. “Right now, nearly all the countries in the developed world have nuclear missiles.”

The U.S. currently has an estimated 50 of its nuclear weapons deployed to Turkey as part of the NATO Western military alliance’s nuclear sharing policy, according to an accidentally-released NATO report published in July by Belgian newspaper De Morgen. The weapons, located at Incirlik Base, are under U.S. control, but some have raised concerns as to their safety there amid regional instability and political differences.

Read more

Does Turkey have ingredients for a Dirty Bomb?

I read online that for a while – in the late 1990s and early 2000s — old radioactive materials from the former USSR countries (Georgia, etc.) were being sent to a site in Turkey for decommissioning. These included items like old RTGs, etc. Is there a risk of the fissile materials in these products being used to construct a “dirty bomb” or other improvised nuclear / radioactive explosive device?

When did Turkey get those Missiles?

Hi Jeremy – do you know when Turkey received the current batch of missiles as part of the NATO Agreement(s)? I thought the presence of “Jupiter’ missiles in Italy and Turkey was a significant negotiating factor in the Cuban Missile Crisis – with these eventually being removed. Have there been missiles continuously in this region since the 1960s?

Sauce for the Goose is Sauce for the Gander

While of course we don’t want Erdogan to get nuclear weapons, he has as much right to them as anyone else, doesn’t he? The nuclear weapons states keep claiming they have a right and nobody else does. No they don’t!

Coming Soon to a Battlefield: Robots that Can Kill

By Zachary Fryer-Biggs | The Atlantic, Sept 3, 2019.

The U.S. Navy’s ship Sea Hunter patrols the oceans without a crew, looking for submarines that, one day, it may attack directly. And the U.S. Army has a missile system that, without humans, can pick out vehicles to attack. So what do we think of such things? And what can we do about it? Here’s what Zachary Fryer-Biggs wrote in The Atlantic:

Read more

Project West Ford and the Copper Needles

Meet Project West Ford — in the 1950s-1960s – the United States of America launched 480 million copper needles into the upper atmosphere for Cold War radio communication. Some of them are allegedly still up there, orbiting in the lower-gravity.

“The same year that Martin Luther King, Jr. marched on Washington and Beatlemania was born, the United States launched half a billion whisker-thin copper wires into orbit in an attempt to install a ring around the Earth. It was called Project West Ford, and it’s a perfect, if odd, example of the Cold War paranoia and military mentality at work in America’s early space program.
Read more

When NASA Shot Copper Needles Into space

On October 21, 1961, NASA launched the first batch of West Ford dipoles into space. A day later, this first payload had failed to deploy from the spacecraft, and its ultimate fate was never completely determined.

“U.S.A. Dirties Space” read a headline in the Soviet newspaper *Pravda. *

**Ambassador Adlai Stevenson was forced to make a statement before the UN declaring that the U.S. would consult more closely with international scientists before attempting another launch. Many remained unsatisfied. Cambridge astronomer Fred Hoyle went so far as to accuse the U.S. of undertaking a military project under “a façade of respectability,” referring to West Ford as an “intellectual crime.”

Maybe there are still needles up there

“But not all the needles returned to Earth. Thanks to a design flaw, it’s possible that several hundred, perhaps thousands of clusters of clumped needles still reside in orbit around Earth, along with the spacecraft that carried them.

The copper needles were embedded in a naphthalene gel designed to evaporate quickly once it reached the vacuum of space, dispersing the needles in a thin cloud. But this design allowed metal-on-metal contact, which, in a vacuum, can weld fragments into larger clumps.”

The Flying Crowbar

An alarming summary of Project Pluto – a Cold War Era program that would use a ramjet engine to create a nuclear-reactor powered nuclear missile. It had the nuclear payload of 15+ hydrogen bombs.

Here’s Project Pluto’s ramjet missile.
“…a locomotive-size missile that would travel at near-treetop level at three times the speed of sound, tossing out hydrogen bombs as it roared overhead. Pluto’s designers calculated that its shock wave alone might kill people on the ground. Then there was the problem of fallout. In addition to gamma and neutron radiation from the unshielded reactor, Pluto’s nuclear ramjet would spew fission fragments out in its exhaust as it flew by. (One enterprising weaponeer had a plan to turn an obvious peace-time liability into a wartime asset: he suggested flying the radioactive rocket back and forth over the Soviet Union after it had dropped its bombs.)

This crazy bastard had so many ways to kill you, it was like a death buffet: should I die in the nuclear blasts of the bombs themselves, or just let the shockwave of the overpassing missile kill me? Maybe I’ll just wait for the radiation sickness as this thing circles endlessly overhead, like a colossal demonic robot vulture. It’s so hard to choose!”

“From an engineering standpoint, Project Pluto was certainly impressive, and pushed the absolute limits of the technology of the time.

Read more

They’ve Forgotten How to Make Fogbank

Re the “modernization” of nuclear weapons, several states which own nuclear weapons have indicated desires to upgrade the technology both around and in nuclear missiles, such as intermediate explosives, launch protocols, and yield calculations. A few years ago, several articles were published in relation to “fogbank” — a critical aerosol component within certain models of nuclear warheads. The production of this aerosol component of warheads was extremely classified and thus repair and/or re-manufacturing of it has been difficult, as many of those who worked on it in the Cold War era have passed away or are in retirement. The fogbank manufacturing facilities in Tennessee were additionally dismantled several years ago. Additional research by a weapons physicist at Lawrence-Livermore Laboratories in the USA have indicated that some of the original explosive yield calculations were off by as much as 30% — as initial test data was processed by hand and at very quick rates in the 1950s through 1970s. Quite alarming!

More information about the yield calculations being a inaccurate can be found here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y-QVPXBcxLU

And Artificial Intelligence itself is supposed to be a real threat to humanity, according to some theorists. But maybe not quite as soon as killer robots.

Haven’t heard a Peep. Have you?

Has any official in Ottawa said a word within the last six months about really cancelling the sale of those machines to the Saudis? We know what the public wants but it doesn’t seem to bother the government officials in democratic societies. Keep pushing, Cesar Jaramillo!

Canadian Doubletalk

The last time I heard any publicity about it was in April (almost three months ago), when Global Affairs Canada declared that Canada had improved the terms of the light armoured vehicles contract to strengthen the review process for the permits. That is double-talk for “Yes, we are going ahead with the sale.” Yuck.

It’s Not Only the Billionaires’ Fault

Canadian politicians claim they are continuing the sale because the contract with Saudi Arabia had been signed BEFORE Canada signed the Arms Trade Treaty, but that they won’t sign such a thing in the future. Of course, we know the real reason: The deal is worth $15 billion, and Ottawa doesn’t want to lose manufacturing jobs. WE “progressive” types don’t like to talk about this fact: It’s not just billionaires’ interests that are at stake, but the income of people who do the manual labor. I think jobs are as important a political factor as the profits of huge corporations.

(Could This Have Happened if Russia Had Adopted the Ban Treaty? Give us your thoughts.)

Russia Says New Weapon Blew Up in Nuclear Accident

By Jake Rudnitsky and Stepan Kravchenko
August 12, 2019

Blast last week at missile test caused brief radiation spike

The failed missile test that ended in an explosion killing five atomic scientists last week on Russia’s White Sea involved a small nuclear power source, according to a top official at the institute where they worked.

The men “tragically died while testing a new special device,” Alexei Likhachev, the chief executive officer of state nuclear monopoly Rosatom, said at their funeral Monday in Sarov, a high-security city devoted to atomic research less than 400 kilometers (250 miles) east of Moscow where the institute is based.

The part of the Russian Federal Nuclear Center that employed them is developing small-scale power sources that use “radioactive materials, including fissile and radioisotope materials” for the Defense Ministry and civilian uses, Vyacheslav Soloviev, scientific director of the institute, said in a video shown by local TV.
Read more

Nuclear-powered missiles?

I read someplace that the US had experimented with using a nuclear reactor to power missiles many years ago but had given up the idea as impractical or maybe they even said too risky. Does anyone know any facts about that? Or is it classified information?

Hi Howard – The project is called Project Pluto – which used a ramjet missile design. The missile had an unshielded reactor which super-heated air to generate thrust. The missile could spend months flying relatively low to the ground – causing huge swaths of irradiated land – as well as sounds loud enough to injure and seriously maim animals and humans that it flew over. From my understanding, it used to additionally have the potential for multiple warheads to be affixed to the ramjet itself. Molson Coors – the alcoholic brewing company – provided important ceramic insulation and other components during the development of this missile class. The longest test for the motor was under 5 minutes (Nevada area, I think) – due to the severe damage it caused – and concerns that it would break loose from its tether and be set loose on Western North America.

See some articles and comments around this class of missiles in Plank One section of this website.

And on the other hand, there’s Costa Rica!. Wow. One of the world’s happiest countries. Here’s how:


Costa Rica’s the Best!

Right. The woman who chaired the Ban Treaty conference is from Costa Rica. So is Oscar Arias, who was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for his work against the Central American crisis. And there is a peace university located there.

U.S.-based experts suspect Russia blast involved nuclear-powered missile

By Jonathan Landay | Reuters, Aug 8

WASHINGTON (Reuters) — U.S.-based nuclear experts said on Friday they suspected an accidental blast and radiation release in northern Russia this week occurred during the testing of a nuclear-powered cruise missile vaunted by President Vladimir Putin last year.

The Russian Ministry of Defense, quoted by state-run news outlets, said that two people died and six were injured on Thursday in an explosion of what it called a liquid propellant rocket engine. No dangerous substances were released, it said. Russia’s state nuclear agency Rosatom said early on Saturday that five of its staff members died.

A spokeswoman for Severodvinsk, a city of 185,000 near the test site in the Arkhangelsk region, was quoted in a statement on the municipal website as saying that a “short-term” spike in background radiation was recorded at noon Thursday. The statement was not on the site on Friday.

The Russian Embassy did not immediately respond for comment.

Two experts said in separate interviews with Reuters that a liquid rocket propellant explosion would not release radiation.

Read more

Rotarians are Peaceniks!

By Richard Denton
“What are old conservative Rotarian businessmen (and now women), doing at a United Nations (UN) Preparatory talk on the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT)”, asked a non-Rotarian female peace person.

This is still the concept that many of the public think about Rotary. Some may know us as a service group like Lions and Kiwanis, but that is about it. We need to do a much better job of branding ourselves, of getting our Rotary name out into the public through our community services such as building parks, building youth facilities and Adopting Road clean ups, sponsoring fund-raisers and donating to worthy organizations and other community projects. But we also need to promote our other programs; Rotary student exchanges, but also the work of the Rotary Foundation – Polio Plus, Rotary scholarships that are actually worth more money and can be done in any university, compared to the Rhodes Scholarship that is better known. We need to promote our Peace Fellowships either the yearlong program or the three month program to university students.
We as Rotarians and we need to get the general populace to know about the history of Rotarians being active starting the United Nations and the International Bill of Human Rights.
Read more

Have the women changed things?

Have Rotarians always been so wise? I think you started letting women join a few years ago. Has that changed anything about the organization’s culture?

What is “EMP”?

A Nuclear Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) is a short, intense pulse of a radio wave that is produced by a nuclear detonation.

Its radius is much greater than the destruction caused by the heat and the blast wave of the nuclear weapon. For example, the pulse of an explosion about 100 km high would cover an area of 4 million km2. An explosion about 350 km high could, for example, cover most of North America, with a voltage of a power that is a million times greater than that of a thunderbolt. That is to say, if the detonation of a nuclear bomb is done from a sufficient height, even when there is not such a great physical destruction, it could affect the life of the inhabitants of a whole country or of several countries.

comment image

China: We Won’t Use Nuclear Weapons First in a War

by David Axe . July 24, 2019
China has reaffirmed its policy of never being the first in a conflict to use nuclear weapons. Experts refer to this policy as “no first use,” or NFU.

The NFU policy reaffirmation, contained in Beijing’s July 2019 strategic white paper, surprised some observers who expected a more expansive and aggressive nuclear posture from the rising power.

Notably, the United States does not have a no-first-use policy. “Retaining a degree of ambiguity and refraining from a no first use policy creates uncertainty in the mind of potential adversaries and reinforces deterrence of aggression by ensuring adversaries cannot predict what specific actions will lead to a U.S. nuclear response,” the Pentagon stated….

Autonomous weapons that kill must be banned, insists UN chief

UN Secretary-General António Guterres urged artificial intelligence (AI) experts meeting in Geneva on Monday to push ahead with their work to restrict the development of lethal autonomous weapons systems, or LAWS, as they are also known.

In a message to the Group of Governmental Experts, the UN chief said that “machines with the power and discretion to take lives without human involvement are politically unacceptable, morally repugnant and should be prohibited by international law”.

No country or armed force is in favour of such “fully autonomous” weapon systems that can take human life, Mr Guterres insisted, before welcoming the panel’s statement last year that “human responsibility for decisions on the use of weapons systems must be retained, since accountability cannot be transferred to machines”. . . .

Read more

How the League of Nations Came About

The idea of creating a League of Nations had been on the agenda at Versailles from its start in January 1919. President Woodrow Wilson was its chief champion. Then on 28 April, there was a unanimous decision to create it, with Geneva as its headquarters.

Some of the League’s later failings were visible from the start. Defeated Germany and revolutionary USSR were not invited to join, and the US Senate turned down the invitation. Nevertheless, the first decade of the League’s life saw a good deal of international cooperation, including the settlement of a number of conflicts that could have led to war. There was a feeling that a new era in international relations had been born. However, the 1930s began with the conflicts that would finally end the League.

Read more

Will They Be Armed?

This plank calls for a UN Emergency Peace Service, but it does not say whether any (or all) of it would be unarmed. Would the people behind this say what they have in mind? Some of us have endorsed it without being clear about how much it will resemble a regular army.

Last edited 2 years ago by Cameron

How much weaponry will be allowed?

Ruth, your question is valid but maybe should be put in reverse order. Maybe the better question is, how much weaponry will any UNEPS peacekeepers be allowed to carry and use? This proposal could be applied as an expansion of war-fighting units or the emphasis could be on foreseeing conflicts “upstream” before they become serious and sending in mediators and lawyers to solve the problems before they become real.

Stop the Arms Trade, Save Yemen

On September 17, Canada formally joined the global Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) as the 105th state party to do so, nearly five years after this landmark multilateral treaty entered into force. We applaud this welcome step. But there will be no standing ovation.

Not while Canadian arms exports to Saudi Arabia continue, already 11 months after Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced that they would be reviewed. And let’s not forget the backdrop to this review: the brutal assassination of journalist Jamal Khashoggi

Read more

With thanks to John Hallam. Note: Published on Abolition-list in April.

Russia nuclear warning: Satan 2 missile that can destroy size of ENGLAND close to launch


Vladimir Putin is warning the West that the biggest beast in his fearsome military arsenal – known as Satan-2 – is close to deployment. Other deadly new-generation weapons – the Kinzhal hypersonic missile and the Peresvet laser system – have been put on “combat duty” already, he claimed.

The final tests involving the Sarmat intercontinental ballistic missile have been a success

“The final tests involving the Sarmat intercontinental ballistic missile have been a success,” he said, according to the Kremlin’s official translation.

The Sarmat –- known in the West as Satan-2 -– is seen as Russia’s most powerful nuclear-capable intercontinental ballistic missile.
Read more

comment image
The government also suggested that “in view of the increasing tensions and imminent arms race, identify opportunities together with allies to achieve the withdrawal of all Russian and American sub-strategic nuclear weapons from all over Europe – from the Atlantic to the Urals.”

Dutch government sets a (qualified) timeline to end the nuclear task

The Dutch seem not to want them!

Susi Snyder, project lead for the PAX No Nukes project, The Netherlands

16 July 2019

This article was first published on the PAX website on 8 July 2019 and is reproduced with the kind permission of the author.

The Dutch government published its response to a report by the Advisory Council on International Affairs (AIV) (31 January 2019), called “Nuclear weapons in a new geopolitical reality.” In the response, the government suggested that when the F-16 is definitely replaced by the F-35 it could be possible to end the nuclear task. The government points out that ending the nuclear task (currently an assignment of a squadron of fighter pilots, allegedly hosting about 20 nuclear bombs, and the related guns, gates and guards to keep them isolated), would not require changes in NATO membership, but would need to be well prepared.

Read more

Who will be the owner of all those new fighter planes——the Netherlands? The 20 nuclear bombs presumably are officially owned by th US, right? The Dutch are just “hosting “ them and can send them home if they want to. But why do they want so many fighter planes?

A replica of the “Gadget” and tower in New Mexico.

Did you hear during the initial Trinity test set up Los Alamos had a scientist climb up to the top of this tower (the original, that is) and “guard” the bomb while measurement equipment was installed, etc. Unfortunately, there was subsequently a lightning storm over the desert. It is very likely the bomb would have exploded prematurely if the tower was struck.

Apparently the scientist was still on the tower during the lightning storm. Terrifying!

It May Only Take 3.5% of the Population to Topple a Dictator — With Civil Resistance

(From The Guardian)

Many people across the United States are despondent about [Trump] – and the threat to democracy his rise could represent. But they shouldn’t be. At no time in recorded history have people been more equipped to effectively resist injustice using civil resistance.

Today, those seeking knowledge about the theory and practice of civil resistance can find a wealth of information at their fingertips. In virtually any language, one can find training manuals, strategy-building tools, facilitation guides and documentation about successes and mistakes of past nonviolent campaigns.

Material is available in many formats, including graphic novels, e-classes, films and documentaries, scholarly books, novels, websites, research monographs, research inventories, and children’s books. And of course, the world is full of experienced activists with wisdom to share.

Read more

Lethal Autonomous Weapons (LAWs) are aptly called “killer robots,” though they don’t actually look like Arnold Schwartznegger. They decide whom to kill without consulting a person. You’d never want to get into a fight with one.

Wish the ATT Could Stop Mass Shootings

The Arms Trade Treaty would not solve the US problems about mass shootings, since it only regulates the transfer of weapons between countries. But it would prevent such things as the current Canadian sale of armoured personnel carriers to Saudi Arabia, a country not known for its humanitarian actions.

Saudis vs Houthis = Dead Civilians

“Not known for its humanitarian actions” is quite an understatement. The war in Yemen was the worst humanitarian crisis in the world (at least until the Covid pandemic struck). Three million people have fled from their homes and there have been over 17,500 civilian casualties. Around 80 percent of Yemen’s population required aid. It was Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) that led the coalition of states in Yemen against the Houthi forces. Most of the deaths were caused by Saudi air strikes.

It takes all types to keep the peace

A U.N. Emergency Peace Service would probably include armed peacekeepers for the worst situations, as well as maybe “white helmet” peacekeepers (who are almost unarmed) and humanitarian workers, conflict resolution experts, and socio-legal experts.

Meet Satan

The “Satan 2” nuclear rocket is aptly named. Maybe the worst weapon ever.

Last edited 2 years ago by Cameron

Yes! The House of Commons wants this government to ”to take a leadership role within NATO in beginning the work necessary for achieving the NATO goal of creating the conditions for a world free of nuclear weapons.” Why isn’t it happening? (And isn’t it a nice room? Not always so nice during Question period when the members get rowdy, but pretty while they are absent.)

Shhh! We’re Canadian MPs. We don’t talk abut Nuclear Weapons

How often are nuclear weapons mentioned in the House of Commons (Canada)? It would be interesting to see an analysis of this over the years — as well as comparison between the municipal, provincial, and federal level of government. The only municipal example that I can think of re: Toronto would be the commitment to being a nuclear weapons free city. How does Canada’s House of Commons compare to other countries — such as the United Kingdom, United States, etc — in regards to the topics of nuclear weapons coming up in discussions?

How often are nuclear weapons mentioned in the House of Commons (Canada)? (Correction: this should be a question, not a statement)

They don’t actually look like this

By the way, killer robots don’t look like robots at all. They are just machines that don’t have human operators. One might look like a vacuum cleaner or a street sweeper.
comment image

Now there’s still a chance to stop them

Polls show that most of the world’s population opposes killer robots. We need to stop them now.